That the client’s good is the only consideration is a fiction, or a shorthand for the much more complex reality, which is that there are often considerations that trump our clients’ best interests.

I see two big differences between a lawyer covering his ass and a lawyer refusing to represent snitches.

First, principle. Nobody has identified a principle behind a lawyer publicly covering his ass at his client’s expense.

Second, consent. If the client gave informed consent to the lawyer shooting off his mouth in front of the judge, there would be nothing ethically wrong with it.

I expect that a lawyer able to actually give a principled justification for making a record against his client would also be able to explain the principle to his client and seek consent. The client might consent to it in order to get that lawyer. And, in my opinion, that would be okay.

Gideon,

The written rules allow lots of unethical behavior. “The state bar’s rules are not the be-all and end-all of ethics; ethics are a highly personal matter. A lawyer is permitted to maintain stricter ethical standards than the rules require.”

I suspect that cooperation in your jurisdiction may not be like cooperation in federal court.

But who cares what that old fart says anyway.

But it seems your stance hinders your client. Of course maybe our discussion is really talking about the rarity of the situation, rather than the norm. But I would have a hard time keeping a hard and fast rule that I will never represent someone willing to cooperate with the government. There are simply too many things that can happen in that short period of time between detention hearing and trial date. But again, this is philosophizing on the minutiae rather than the theory.

My ultimate question comes to this: how is this philosophy consistent with your previous post about covering your ass? If the point of an attorney putting on the record the latest plea offer in an effort to preserve the record for a future grievance or habeas claim of IAC is attorney-centered, then how is denying a client midway through a federal case the opportunity to cooperate with the government because his attorney doesn’t like to do it, any different? It seems inconsistent to me.

Of course as SHG likes to say, I am “Young.” And yet, humble.